Topic: A focus on today’s NYT article regarding India, status, consumption, materialism…the long post I was referring to last time.
I found an article in the Times this morning to be a good one for kickstarting some more conversation. The issue at hand is India’s rapid-jump from a mostly state-run economy, to an “American-style” free market capitalist society, focussing specifically on the boom (for those with the right jobs and cash-at-hand), in automobile purchases.
The article begins by stating that India has entered a new “culture of money,” one defined by a culture of both making and spending money. Whether or not capitalism is solely responsible for this culture, as well as whether or not this is “good or bad,” are things we will get into in a moment.
The article continues, noting the growing rich, including the middle-class, although the author is quick to remind us of the World Bank’s report that India is still home to the largest population of people living in poverty.
What affect is the growth of car owners having in India, and how does this parallel life here in America? One Indian was quoted, “This is the American 1950′s happening in India now.” The growth of the Indian economy, has led to this boom in car owners, which has led to more car dealerships in India, expanded highway development, and increased travel by many people within the country. It has resulted in more advertising for cars, cars serving as luxuries and toys for many, and has given some people access to their first automobiles. (Paul Krugman has an article about the relationship between economic growth and whether this really has any benefits for the avg. Joe in today’s op-ed section).
While the effects of capitalism and English colonialism are described as leading factors in India’s high-rates of poverty, the article notes that capitalism is now being embraced in parts of the country. Not just in cars, but in their habits of using debt and credit to make purchases of an ever-growing amount of goods and services.
“America, of course, went through a similar evolution: the making of a postwar consumerist economy; the introduction of credit cards and growing comfort with, and dependence on, debt; the rise of an advertising culture. India today offers the chance to watch it in real time, at a hyper, almost-out-of-control, pace.”
“Now the people want to spend and enjoy,” Mr. Prakky said. “Everyone wants upgradation”: the scooter owner wants a motorbike, the motorbike owner a car, the car owner a more expensive one.”
I want to stop here for a minute and discuss this quote by Mr. Prakky. “People want to spend and enjoy.” I’m assuming many people reading this have pre-conceived judgements about the relationships between spending and happiness, and the way these two things play out in our culture. However, it’s something I want to continue to look deeper at.
First of all, I think it’s healthy for people, a culture, or a nation, to not be completely hostile to the idea that buying material things makes people happy. Owning our own books, buying toys, doing things like eating out, going to the movies, going on vacations…these are some of the very things that make life enjoyable. The desire to upgrade from scooter to motorbike to car to fancy car, is a natural progression. What we often think about is simply a person who lives to buy a BMW or a Mercedes or any number of fancy and expensive cars, but simply can’t afford it, and maybe goes ahead and spends beyond his means, which puts him in debt and makes him work harder to make more money so maybe he can buy a second BMW or Mercedes. But…I think that story, which generally comes out of the “progressive camp,” isn’t really what’s going on. I think what people are interested in is looking for ways to upgrade, and if what is happening in India is that people are finally upgrading so that they can own cars which are probably still of a much lesser quality than what the avg. American is driving, than I have no quarrel with thee…good sir knight.
The article than goes to address the issue of how free-market capitalism is affecting Indian culture.
“This is a far bigger change for Indian society than it was for America, which in many ways was founded around the notion of the individual. Indian society has always been more about duty, or dharma, than drive, more about responsibility to others than the realization of individual desire.”
I find this particularly interesting, especially in highlighting the differences between the Indian and American situations, but also by highlighting how culture is not merely influenced by economics and politics, but comes from the general attitudes and philosophies of the individuals that make up a country. The fact that “Indian society has always been more about duty than drive, more about responsibility to others than the realization of individual desires,” makes a case in point. Free-market capitalism is not a one-size-fits-all program. It’s highly dependant on the way in which a country embraces it.
But…perhaps there is something in capitalism, in its very nature of movement towards profits, innovation, progress, and growth, that creates its own culture beyond the will of the people? Is this so? Is it the system itself, or is it merely the people implementing the system? Or as my friend put it, is it the people, or the chains in which we are all tied together, that is the source of our problems?
“Luxuries are now necessities…and children are focused more on earning for themselves than on caring for their parents. Indians have always been critical of what they see as American selfishness, the way children relegate parents to retirement homes so they can pursue their own lives. Now, suddenly, they are hearing such stories among themselves.
Spreading affluence also has brought new competitive anxiety. Where once everyone in a neighborhood had an Ambassador or a Fiat, the hierarchy of livelihoods, of success, now can be parsed easily through cars.”
There are several things you might want to think about. First is the difference in culture between India and what Indians have described as “American selfishness” particularly the practice of “children relegat[ing] parents to retiremment homes so they can pursue their own lives.” Is this a fair assessment?
Second, the question is, leaving the broad attack of American selfishness alone, is the assessment of embracing capitalism leads to the practice of children abandoning their parents so they can pursue their own lives.
I personally don’t believe capitalism is the cause, rather it is likely a generational issue affected by a wide blend of influences. There is simply more opportunity now for young people than ever before. For example, a generation ago most parents didn’t go away to school, and it wasn’t very common to take off and travel the world. Now, companies are popping up left and right to help people leave home (at least for a short while). That change is merely one of culture, and in many ways is a very beneficial thing. Sure, more people might be living farther from home and not spending as much direct time w/ their parents, but we also have developments in technology that allow us to maintain contact w/ our families in new ways and one might argue in richer ways since we are able to tell and show our parents all the wonderful things we are discovering away from home!
“The car fever here is in part a triumph of marketing to people who did not grow up being marketed to. Advertising in India has succeeded in making, as Mr. Khanduri said, luxuries into necessities, in portraying persuasion as knowledge.”
I asked this question the other day…what is the relationship between marketing and people’s views of material goods and consumption? It’s a chicken and the egg question…
1) Has marketing and advertising triumphed in convincing people that luxuries are now necessities (buy this fancy car and girls will think you’ll make a wonderful mate)?
OR
2) Did people decide that certain luxuries were necessities (this new car is friggin’ sweet, it handles better, is more comfortable and fun to drive in, it looks good, has better safety features, I can use an online navigation system so I don’t get lost, and entertain my kids in the backseat w/ a DVD during a long drive), and then advertisers have used ads to help buyers and sellers come togheter?
So…what, if any, are the real concerns for both India’s embracing capitalism and cars? Obviously, higher car wrecks is one down side. There is also an increased demand on foreign oil for auto fuel, and traffic problems to deal with.
Then there are also the non-vehical related concerns coming out of India, since most people (1 billion people minus approximately 8 million car users) don’t have cars.
“The rise of the auto, and the investment in highways, dovetails with a larger trend of privatization in Indian life, in which the “haves” are those who can afford to pay for services the government does not provide: efficient transport, clean water, good schools, decent health care.”
What is life like for the “have-nots?” I think that’s the important question in India, in the United States, and across the entire globe. In a privatized soceity, or more specifically a capitalist society that holds a philosophy where taxes should be low, and gov’t spending should be near invisable (for things like public transport, public schools, and public health care), there will be those “haves” with money who can always count on their individual financial fortune for transportation, schooling, and medical care. Yet there are certailny almost always a majority of “have-nots” who do not have the same fortunes, both financial fortunes as well as the good fortune of being able to have access to healthy food, water, good schools, and adequate medical care, and these people are the ones that we must not forget when having a political and economic discussion.
The article ends with a final downside to economic development, being the increase in personal debt. I believe personal debt can be tied to two things, people being marketed to spend, and people being marketed to use credit cards to afford their purchases. But…as I stated earlier, I’m not quite sold on the idea that marketing necessarily is the primary cause of individual’s spending habits. People enter debt because of various reasons, including high educational costs, medical costs, and spending for basic needs. Sometimes, people simply don’t have the knowledge or experience at the time to realize fully the consequences of debt.
For some, entering into debt is caused not necessarily by the pressure created by ads, but by the pressures created by seeing what’s around you. For example, I don’t necessarily believe that people went scrambling for I-pods because of advertising. I believe this is a perfect example simply of buyers being in favor of spending for a new technology, and sellers using advertising to make buyers aware that there was something new to be bought. Compare this to the argument that sellers use advertising to make buyers buy.
I think there is another interesting discussion to be had about people’s intelligence and naiivity. Some may argue that in many cases advertising makes people buy, such as arguments against cigarette ads that make pry on the psychology of kids to want to be cool and fit in, while others may argue that advertising to informed buyers, such as for expensive purchases like technology, merely involve helping to make the public aware of the new technology.
One last point on this topic…is going back to the idea that the pressure to buy, spend, consume, etc., comes not necessarily from the marketing done by corporations, but by the values and pressures of individuals and individual communities. A perfect example of this is the pressure to buy an expensive college education. While the US News & World reports is largely responsiblie for marketing which schools are “the best,” it is largely the values of parents, and their attitudes towards one another, that allows those rankings to create such high anxiety and pressure to go to the “best school,” which oftentime involves spending an amount ($120,000 – $1.50 in late fees) way beyond the true cost of getting an education.
As usual, feel free to tacklet as little, or as much, or none at all.
And…to return this blog to the personal world of Dan for a moment.
-Giants won 17-10…move to 1st place on top of the NFC East…will now watch the rest of the season from the comforts of my warm couch!
-had a very pleasant experience meeting another friend through this very blog…and discovered some hidden NYC treasures as a result!
-helped out my old high school wrestling coach on Sat. morning. Was my first time wrestling in almost 7 years. Had a quick reminder of how physically exhausting the sport is, and also remembered why the sport is stuck in my blood. Physical strength and athletic ability aside, the sport is largely a phsycial chess match between two people. There’s hundreds of situations you can be in, and you need to have such good understanding of body positioning. This sport should hopefully provide me with winter entertainment until I can get outdoors again, and maybe I’ll relive my dreams and enter a competition sometime if I can get my conditioning up and catch-up on the 7yr. layoff.
Things are good…and future posts about the mind, consciousness, biochemisty, jazz, building rocking chairs, and a letter I’m drafting to be published in my school paper are to come.